This the basic difference. Republicans believe that that if you let the wealthy spend capital it will make Americans prosperous. Democrats believe that the federal government investing in the healthcare & education of our people will make America prosperous & productive.

Here's an incredible stat: you could pay to lift all seniors out of poverty with only 3% of the budget for Social Security. This program is going to destroy the prospects of future generations because we're shoveling endless amounts of money to old people who don't need it.

If you're very concerned about extroardinary wealth leading to concentration of power in government, may I suggest a system of horizontal and vertical checks and balances, restricted to limited and enumerated powers?

I really don’t understand true greed. If I was worth $1 trillion, you’d have to physically stop me from solving as many of the world’s problems as possible. Everyone would have a home, food on the table, proper healthcare, happiness. I just don’t get it.

We're making sure our kids are safe online.

DoorDash: "Hey, it kinda seems like you might be having a bad day. Would a discounted meal help at all?" The Anti-consumer: HOW DARE YOU!! THIS SHOULD BE ILLEGAL!

Anyone on the right who is using this rare moment of opportunity to grind internecine intra-right disagreements is a problem. The enemy is not the portion of the right you disagree with on 20%. The enemy is the left. Focus.

I wrote about the insanity of "medical privacy." It's hard now to do research that could cure major diseases because we are too worried about the handling of people's personal data, which they themselves appear not to care about. HIPAA was a mistake. richardhanania.com/p/privacy…

Do you think capitalism survives without the government?

If a historian on the right abused evidence in this way, they'd face career ruination. When Boston University's Quinn Slobodian does it, he gets a Guggenheim fellowship, book awards, and a Hewlett Foundation grant. Academia's rot runs far deeper than a simple crisis of rigor.

The right is facing a serious problem about how to handle its intellectuals The left has the university where it can assign smart people good paying high status jobs where they can explore and cultivate ideas The right has no similar institutions, so rightwing intellectuals end up in thinktanks or content production This creates the "public intellectual" who comes onto the scene with a burst of insight Content production is a grind, even if you're saying intelligent things eventually the need to say something about everything leaves you little time to think deeply about anything Academics are also not really equipped to be public figures, they are not built to do battle with a hostile public on a regular basis I think this is a lot of what has happened with guys like Jordan Peterson, he should be given the time to reflect on an issue and put out something every few months, instead the content churn and social medial battles make it difficult for him to say anything new or interesting With no time to reflect on and cultivate new ideas the public intellectual has less and less to say and more and more demand for saying something Not trying to make Peterson a victim here but the right need a better plan to cultivate its serious thinkers, throwing them into the content mill is not a sustainable plan

Carney government to ban social media for kids younger than 16, but will allow exemptions nationalpost.com/news/politi…

Is reading books worth it

Yes, I believe Slobodian offered a profoundly important insight when he argued that neoliberalism wasn’t about free markets; it was about insulating capital from democracy.